How Pope Francis is changing the Catholic Church

[Fish and Bread]

Link:

How Pope Francis is changing the Catholic Church

Excerpt:

But days before the ceremony, four cardinals made clear that church unity was, under Francis, elusive. These men, two of whom are in their 80s and no longer in active ministry or eligible to vote for the next pope, had written a letter to Pope Francis in September that read like a Gospel passage.

Teacher, they seemed to ask, if a man divorces his wife and the woman marries again, raises a family and continues to practice her faith, should she be welcomed to Communion, as you seem to suggest in your pastoral letter “Amoris Laetitia,” or should we follow the rules set forward by your predecessor, St. John Paul II, which would prevent her from participating in the sacrament?

The letter, called a dubia, contains five yes-or-no questions. It was written to call into question ideas Pope Francis promulgated following a two-year consultative process with bishops from around the world that ended in October 2015. The pope did not respond directly to the cardinals, which has bothered some church traditionalists, but he has not exactly ignored their concerns either. In a homily a few weeks before the consistory—the ceremony in which new cardinals are created—the pope lamented the rigidity of some churchmen, which many have interpreted as a not-so-subtle jab at those criticizing his reforms.

“Let’s pray for our brothers and sisters who think that by becoming rigid they are following the path of the Lord,”Francis preached. “May the Lord make them feel that he is our Father and that he loves mercy, tenderness, goodness, meekness, humility. And may he teach us all to walk in the path of the Lord with these attitudes.”

Note how the author subtly implies that these renegade Cardinals are pharisees by placing them in the role of the pharisees in his biblical analogy to the story where Jesus is given a trick question by the pharisees about remarriage. Good writing IMO.

Also, look at what Pope Francis said at the end of the excerpt.

If you have time, though, click on the link and read the whole article. Interesting stuff.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

The Pharisees were for remarriage after a divorce.

But Jesus called that adultery.

 

[Fish and Bread]

The Pharisees were the ones who were for remarriage after a divorce.

And Jesus is the one who called it adultery.

I'm pretty sure the question the pharisees asked involved someone's husband dying and the widow remarrying, and this process happening several times in succession. The pharisees them asked "Who's wife is she in heaven?" and Jesus answered "There are no marriages in heaven." (quotes paraphrased). I don't remember the pharisees mentioning divorce or Jesus accusing anyone of adultery in the bible story.

 

[Tomm]

The 4 cardinals are my heroes.

 

[Fish and Bread]

The 4 cardinals are my heroes.

I'm going to side with the Pope on this one.

 

[Tomm]

I'm going to side with the Pope on this one.

The 4 cardinals are my heroes because they are faithful to the Lord.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

I don't remember the pharisees mentioning divorce or Jesus accusing anyone of adultery in the bible story.

“And Pharisees came up to him [Jesus] and tested him by asking, ‘Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?’ He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one”? So they are no longer two but one. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.’ They said to him, ‘Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity [an unlawful marriage], and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery.’” - Mt 19:3-9

“Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” - Jesus, Lk 16.18

 

[Fish and Bread]

“And Pharisees came up to him [Jesus] and tested him by asking, ‘Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?’ He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one”? So they are no longer two but one. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.’ They said to him, ‘Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity [an unlawful marriage], and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery.’” - Mt 19:3-9

“Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.” - Jesus, Lk 16.18

Ah, it looks like we were thinking of two different bible stories.

In was thinking of Matthew 22:23-33 (NRSV):

23 The same day some Sadducees came to him, saying there is no resurrection;[a] and they asked him a question, saying, 24 “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies childless, his brother shall marry the widow, and raise up children for his brother.’ 25 Now there were seven brothers among us; the first married, and died childless, leaving the widow to his brother. 26 The second did the same, so also the third, down to the seventh. 27 Last of all, the woman herself died. 28 In the resurrection, then, whose wife of the seven will she be? For all of them had married her.”

29 Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31 And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is God not of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the crowd heard it, they were astounded at his teaching.

/end of scriptural quote

I think it's more likely that this was the passage that the author of the article was alluding to based on the author's likely position on the question being discussed. The passage you cite is perhaps relevant to the discussion, but would be arguing against the point the author seems to want to make. Both the article and the passage about marriage in heaven also have the questioners using the word "Teacher" to address Jesus, whereas the passage about divorce does not, although that could just be coincidence.

I should note, though, as a correction to my initial post, that the story I was thinking of featured the Saduccees questioning Christ, not the Pharisees. I said Pharisees, but that was my mistaken recollection, not anything that the article said.

Its also possible that I am reading too much into it and the author is not implying anything more than that dialogue reminds him in a generic way of the type of exchanges that occurred in scripture (Of which the passage you found and the passage I found would both be examples), and not of any specific passage.

 

[Fish and Bread]

The 4 cardinals are my heroes because they are faithful to the Lord.

What I like about Pope Francis is his pastoral wisdom and his love of God and neighbor.

He embodies for me the gist of 1 Corithians 13 (NRSV):

If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast,[a] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

4 Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

8 Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9 For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; 10 but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13 And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Ah, it looks like we were thinking of two different bible stories.

In was thinking of Matthew 22:23-33 (NRSV):

23 The same day some Sadducees came to him, saying there is no resurrection;[a] and they asked him a question, saying, 24 “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies childless, his brother shall marry the widow, and raise up children for his brother.’ 25 Now there were seven brothers among us; the first married, and died childless, leaving the widow to his brother. 26 The second did the same, so also the third, down to the seventh. 27 Last of all, the woman herself died. 28 In the resurrection, then, whose wife of the seven will she be? For all of them had married her.”

29 Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31 And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is God not of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the crowd heard it, they were astounded at his teaching.

/end of scriptural quote

I think it's more likely that this was the passage that the author of the article was alluding to based on the author's likely position on the question being discussed. The passage you cite is perhaps relevant to the discussion, but would be arguing against the point the author seems to want to make. Both the article and the passage about marriage in heaven also have the questioners using the word "Teacher" to address Jesus, whereas the passage about divorce does not, although that could just be coincidence.

I should note, though, as a correction to my initial post, that the story I was thinking of featured the Saduccees questioning Christ, not the Pharisees. I said Pharisees, but that was my mistaken recollection, not anything that the article said.

Its also possible that I am reading too much into it and the author is not implying anything more than that dialogue reminds him in a generic way of the type of exchanges that occurred in scripture (Of which the passage you found and the passage I found would both be examples), and not of any specific passage.

The Sadducees were different than the Pharisees. The Pharisees believed in the Resurrection, but the Sadducees didn't. So the point the Sadducees were trying to make was not about divorce but about the Resurrection. And they wanted to trick Jesus with that question. But Jesus revealed how the Resurrection was still possible in their hypothetical scenario. So who today is more like the Sadducees? Who denies the Resurrection? That's the question.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

The title alone is bound to wind up those of a more conservative persuasion.